Trial reportCancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology2010
A randomized trial of a computer-tailored decision aid to improve prostate cancer screening decisions: results from the Take the Wheel trial.
Trial report in Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT00207636 (Community Interventions in Non-medical Settings to Increase Informed Decision Making for Prostate Cancer Screening - Harvard - SIP 21-04), which is not on this map. Cited by 30 papers, 10 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Community Interventions in Non-medical Settings to Increase Informed Decision Making for Prostate Cancer Screening - Harvard - SIP 21-04
Who cites it
30 citing papers in PubMed, 10 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 53 citations in OpenAlex.
- Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024Pooled it
- Web-based decision aids for cancer clinical decisions: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2021Pooled it
- Are We Improving? Update and Critical Appraisal of the Reporting of Decision Process and Quality Measures in Trials Evaluating Patient Decision Aids.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2021Pooled it
- Prostate Cancer Screening Patient Decision Aids: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.American journal of preventive medicine · 2018Pooled it
- Web-Based Versus Usual Care and Other Formats of Decision Aids to Support Prostate Cancer Screening Decisions: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2018Pooled it
- Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017Pooled it
- Are cancer-related decision aids appropriate for socially disadvantaged patients? A systematic review of US randomized controlled trials.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2016Pooled it
- Features of Computer-Based Decision Aids: Systematic Review, Thematic Synthesis, and Meta-Analyses.Journal of medical Internet research · 2016Pooled it
- Providing information about options in patient decision aids.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2013Pooled it
- Systematic Review of Commercially Available Mobile Phone Applications for Prostate Cancer Education.American journal of men's healthPooled it
- Communicating risk to promote colorectal cancer screening: a multi-method study to test tailored versus targeted message strategies.Health education research · 2022Trial
- Decision making in prostate cancer screening using decision aids vs usual care: a randomized clinical trial.JAMA internal medicine · 2013Trial
- The Personal Patient Profile-Prostate decision support for men with localized prostate cancer: a multi-center randomized trial.Urologic oncology · 2013Trial
- Fostering informed decisions: a randomized controlled trial assessing the impact of a decision aid among men registered to undergo mass screening for prostate cancer.Patient education and counseling · 2013Trial
- Mixed-Method Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Shared Decision-Making Tools for Cancer Screening.Cancers · 2023Review
- Effect of a Prostate Cancer Screening Decision Aid for African-American Men in Primary Care Settings.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2020Article
- Adaptation and Initial Psychometric Evaluation of an Informed Prostate Cancer Screening Decision Self-Efficacy Scale for African-American Men.Journal of racial and ethnic health disparities · 2020Article
- Preparing African American Men to Make Informed Prostate Cancer Screening Decisions: Development and Pilot Testing of an Interactive Online Decision Aid.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2020Article
- [Shared decision-making in prostate cancer patients].Der Urologe. Ausg. A · 2019Article
- A Review of Decision Aids for Patients Considering More Than One Type of Invasive Treatment.The Journal of surgical research · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate a decision aid (DA) designed to promote informed decision making for prostate cancer screening.
methodsTwelve work sites were randomly assigned to an intervention or nonintervention comparison condition. Intervention sites received access to a computer-tailored DA at the workplace. Male employees age 45 years and above (n = 625) completed surveys at baseline and at 3-month follow-up, documenting aspects of informed decision making.
resultsUsing an intention-to-treat analysis, men in the intervention group were significantly more likely to have made a screening decision and to have improved knowledge without increased decisional conflict, relative to men in the comparison group. These changes were observed despite the fact that only 30% of men in intervention sites used the DA. Among DA users, similar improvements were observed, although the magnitudes of changes were substantially greater, and significant improvements in decision self-efficacy were observed.
conclusionsA DA offered in the workplace promoted decision making, improved knowledge, and increased decision self-efficacy among users, without increasing decisional conflict. However, participation was suboptimal, suggesting that better methods for engaging men in workplace interventions are needed. IMPACT STATEMENT: This trial shows the efficacy of a computer-tailored DA in promoting informed decisions about prostate cancer screening. The DA was delivered through work sites, thereby providing access to resources required to participate in informed decision making without requiring a medical appointment. However, participation rates were suboptimal, and additional strategies for engaging men are needed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.